RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


tazzygirl -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 7:03:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Tazzy...way to call a spade a spade.....you rock!


yeah, well, while people pussyfoot around the issue, i get tired of watching the jabs and thrusts and prefer to strike at the heart of the matter.




Wolf2Bear -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 7:03:48 PM)

  • Only native-born U.S. citizens (or those born abroad, but only to parents who were both citizens of the U.S.) may be president of the United States, though from time to time that requirement is called into question, most recently after Arnold Schwarzenegger, born in Austria, was elected governor of California, in 2003. The Constitution originally provided a small loophole to this provision: One needn't have been born in the United States but had to be a citizen at the time the Constitution was adopted. But, since that occurred in 1789, that ship has sailed.
  • One must also be at least 35 years of age to be president. John F. Kennedy was the youngest person to be elected president; he was 43 years old when he was inaugurated in 1961. There is no maximum age limit set forth in the Constitution. Ronald Reagan was the oldest president; at the end of his term in 1988, he was nearly 77.
  • Finally, one must live in the United States for at least 14 years to be president, in addition to being a natural-born citizen. The Constitution is vague on this point. For example, it does not make clear whether those 14 years need to be consecutive or what the precise definition of residency is. So far, however, this requirement has not been challenged. These are the only explicit criteria in the Constitution.  
About.com: US Government info

thinkquest.com  :

Presidential Requirements   The Constitution requires that a candidate for the presidency must be a "natural-born" citizen of the United States, at least 35 years of age, and a resident of the United States for at least 14 years. Natural-Born An understanding of the nation is essential for the role of President. The framers of the Constitution strongly believed that a person must be born in the United States in order to fully understand the country.

35 Years of Age Personal experience was very important to the framers. They felt that unless a person had reached the age of thirty-five, it was highly unlikely for that person to have experienced enough to govern a nation.

14 Year Residency Part of being President involves dealing with both domestic and foreign problems. In order to face these problems, previous knowledge of the nation's history in these matters is necessary. The framers decided that fourteen years was an adequate time span to comprehend these issues.

The following answer some frequently asked questions about the requirements and special cases. Could a person born abroad to parents who are U.S. citizens eligible to be President? Yes. A child born of U.S. citizens anywhere in the world is considered a natural born U.S. citizen and is eligible.

What exactly does "natural-born" mean? Persons born citizens of the United States are considered natural-born. Therefore, a child born of illegal immigrants or born on U.S. soil yet lived his or her life out of the nation could still be President. A naturalized citizen could not.

Does a person need to be married to be President? Nope. There have been several Presidents who were not married at the time of their election or during their term of office.




tazzygirl -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 7:08:59 PM)

thank you bear!




pahunkboy -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 7:12:04 PM)

well Pastor manning had the CIA on him.   He had sent over for Obamas grandmother from Kenya to come to NY- and tell what she knew about his birth location.

The supreme court is suppose to rule by July on this lawsuit- in case you wondered.




tazzygirl -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 7:22:44 PM)

And what do you think the outcome will be?

Because, honestly, this Manning person doesnt seem to be all there. First, from what i understand, he is an ex-convict. Second, not only is he attacking Obama, he is also accusing the SS of intimidation, Columbia University of fraud, has been banned from youtube for heat speech, ect ect ect.




slvemike4u -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 7:31:51 PM)

Does anyone ever wonder why a new nation composed of immigrants and the children of immigrants would have a native born citizen requirement......short answer.
Alexander Hamilton,a bastard born in the Carribean Hamilton had many enemies(of course in his mind they were lesser lights jealous of his genius)men who had no desire to see Hamilton hold the office of Chief Executive....hence the native born American requirement.




thornhappy -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 7:35:12 PM)

Man, it drives me nuts when folks say correlation = causation.  It's gotta be the biggest mistake in the statistics world (the first thing we were taught).  That principle spawns countless conspiracy myths.




DarkSteven -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 7:38:31 PM)

I thought it was that the conspiracy myths spawned the principle... [8D]




Wolf2Bear -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 7:41:18 PM)

Seems to me that the only way to know the exact reason for the natural born American citizen requirement is to go back in time to when the Constitution was written to include that stipulation. Until that happens, all else is mere conjecture and assumptions.




tazzygirl -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 7:44:16 PM)

Supposedly, the reason given was to prevent foreign interests from taking over the new country... such as with england and having german monarchs, ect.




Marc2b -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 8:01:40 PM)

Yopu are right but you are only half right. Yes, some of President Obamas detractors are racist cranks but some of them are just political partisans who will jump on anything with which to bash the opposition. Still others are just your run of the mill conspiricy nutcases.

The birther issue is unique to Pesident Obama (at least amongst modern Presidents) not so much because of his race but because of his fahter's Kenyon nationality. If we had a white President who's father was a British national, I am quite certain that the issue would still be with us. The racist cranks wouldn't have it as an issue but the political partisans and the conspiricy nutcases would still be swinging it around.





Marc2b -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 8:04:51 PM)

quote:

Seems to me that the only way to know the exact reason for the natural born American citizen requirement is to go back in time to when the Constitution was written to include that stipulation. Until that happens, all else is mere conjecture and assumptions.


I can't help but wonder... does the natural born citizen requierment mean that nobody born by C-section can be President?




slvemike4u -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 8:05:54 PM)

Aww come on guys the Hamilton angle is way sexier....intrigue and jealousies.....great men subject to the same human frailities as the butcher down the block.
Why the fuck would you want to punch holes in that particular version ........plus the story has the utility of making great sense.....the person most injured by that requirement was Hamilton....arguably the best and brightest of the Founding Fathers....forever barred from the highest office in the land in the country he so ably helped give birth to.
Shit you guys are no fun !!!!




AnimusRex -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 8:31:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thornhappy

Man, it drives me nuts when folks say correlation = causation.  It's gotta be the biggest mistake in the statistics world (the first thing we were taught).  That principle spawns countless conspiracy myths.


So I suppose you don't believe that Kleenex causes the common cold?




thornhappy -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 8:36:35 PM)

Of course not  * hrmph *.  Saline nose spray does!




cadenas -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 8:37:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
But both his parents are natural born citizens.


Exactly. And Obama's mother also was undisputedly a US citizen.

BTW, military bases do NOT qualify as US soil for citizenship purposes. Children to Panamanian parents aren't US citizens regardless of whether they were delivered in a base hospital or not.





cadenas -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 8:43:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wolf2Bear
Only native-born U.S. citizens (or those born abroad, but only to parents who were both citizens of the U.S.) may be president of the United States


Actually, native-born is generally held to mean "citizen from birth" and already includes those born abroad. So the parenthesis is somewhat redundant.

More importantly "citizenship from birth" usually only requries a single US citizen parent.





Brain -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 8:44:38 PM)

No, it's racial. They can’t stand the idea of a black man as president.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

I don't agree that it is about race.  I suspect that McCain would have the same nutcases chasing him had he been elected.

Part of it is that the Internet makes it so easy to start or perpetuate baseless rumors.

Does Hayworth actually believe that of all the names that a hypothetical fraudulent Presidential candidate could choose from, that he would pick Barack Hussein Obama?  Come on now!






DarkSteven -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 8:46:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

Seems to me that the only way to know the exact reason for the natural born American citizen requirement is to go back in time to when the Constitution was written to include that stipulation. Until that happens, all else is mere conjecture and assumptions.


I can't help but wonder... does the natural born citizen requierment mean that nobody born by C-section can be President?


Odd that that's the way you took it.  I was wondering about an undead candidate myself.




Wolf2Bear -> RE: President Guilty of Identify Theft? (2/16/2010 9:42:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cadenas

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wolf2Bear
Only native-born U.S. citizens (or those born abroad, but only to parents who were both citizens of the U.S.) may be president of the United States


Actually, native-born is generally held to mean "citizen from birth" and already includes those born abroad. So the parenthesis is somewhat redundant.

More importantly "citizenship from birth" usually only requries a single US citizen parent.




If you check the 2 links I provided, that is where that post came from and is NOT my interpretation.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875